richard-day-gramsci-is-dead

... and Now 163become visible, to be named or ‘recognized’, is the beginning of theend of autonomy, the first stage of capture. Existing physically andvirtually within the cracks of the societies of control, the TAZ is, as Ihave noted, a quintessentially postmodern tactic for social protest andthe prefiguration of alternatives. At the same time, however, Bey givesthe TAZ a genealogy in modern socialism, first in the experiments ofthe Utopian socialists, then in the revolutionary urban communes ofParis, Lyon, Munich, the free Soviets of the early days of the Russianrevolution, as well as anarchist Spain. Most of these examples, ofcourse, were revolutionary in their intent—they had clear hegemonicgoals. Not so the ‘pirate utopias’ and ‘madcap’ republics (125) whichBey also holds up as examples of the TAZ. These formations differfrom the others in that they display no will at all to become the state,but rather make every effort they can to stay off the maps of power,while at the same time maintaining a parasitic (piratical) relationshipwith the dominant apparatuses of capture and exploitation. Thisreveals the TAZ in its most interesting form, as an island of achievedsocial change, a place where the revolution has actually happened, ifonly for a few, if only for a short time.The necessarily fleeting nature of the TAZ, however, makes onewonder whether it can do more than offer temporary respite to asmall number of individuals, whether it can in fact prefigure broaderand deeper social change. Bey argues—convincingly, I think—thatparticipation in a TAZ can involve intensities that ‘give shapeand meaning to the entirety of a life’ (100). Each moment livingdifferently, each quantum of energy that the neoliberal societiesof control do not capture and exploit, is indeed a contributionto the long-term construction of alternative subjects, spaces andrelationships. However, I wonder whether the dichotomy between‘permanent revolution’ and ‘temporary autonomous zone’ is notitself somewhat suspect. Can there not be modes of organizationthat are neither utterly fleeting nor totally enslaving? In a shortpiece on the permanent TAZ, or PAZ, Bey notes that ‘not all existingautonomous zones are “temporary”’, and postulates that the PAZand the TAZ can and should feed off of one another: ‘The essenceof the PAZ must be the long-drawn-out intensification of the joysand-risksof the TAZ’ (1993). Here one might think of long-runningintentional communities, social centres, squats, bookstores or cafésthat survive while maintaining their commitment to autonomy andcommunity. To do so, they must always be aware of the dangersof both insularity and popularity and manage, for a few years or